IN THE CASE OF:  	

      BOARD DATE:  	9 October 2013

      CASE NUMBER:  	AR20130006312
___________________________________________________________________________

Board Determination and Directed Action

After carefully examining the applicant's record of service during the period of enlistment under review and considering the Discussion and Recommendation which follows, the Board determined the discharge was both proper and equitable and voted to deny relief.




      
      
      Presiding Officer
      
I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Department of the Army Discharge Review Board in this case.

THE APPLICANT’S REQUEST AND STATEMENT:

1.  The applicant requests an upgrade of his uncharacterized discharge to honorable.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, his condition at the time of discharge was a result of an injury sustained on active duty while training at Fort Leonard Wood Missouri.

DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION:

a. Application Receipt Date:			29 March 2013
b. Discharge Received:			Uncharacterized
c. Date of Discharge:				6 March 2001
d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE Code:	 	Failed Medical/Physical/Procurement
Standards, AR 635-200, Paragraph 5-11, JFW RE-3
e. Unit of assignment:				D Company, 82nd CM BN TR TC, Fort 
      Leonard Wood, MO 
f. Current Enlistment Date/Term:		2 November 2000, 8 years 
g. Current Enlistment Service:		4 months, 5 days
h. Total Service:				5 months, 24 days
i. Time Lost:					None
j. Previous Discharges:			None
k. Highest Grade Achieved:			E-2
l. Military Occupational Specialty:		None
m. GT Score:					NIF
n. Education:					14 years
o. Overseas Service:				None
p. Combat Service:				None
q. Decorations/Awards:			None
r. Administrative Separation Board: 		No
s. Performance Ratings:			None
t. Counseling Statements:			None
u. Prior Board Review:				No
SUMMARY OF SERVICE:		
	
The applicant enlisted in the Army Reserves on 2 November 2000, for a period of 8 years.  He was 22 years old at the time of entry and a high school graduate.  His available record documents no acts of valor or significant achievements.  




SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES:

1.  The applicant’s record is void of the specific facts and circumstances concerning the events which led to the discharge from the Army Reserve.  However, the record contains a properly constituted DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty), which was authenticated by the applicant’s signature.  He was discharged as a PVT/E-2.

2.  The DD Form 214 indicates that on 6 March 2001, the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 5, paragraph 5-11, AR 635-200, for failure to meet procurement medical fitness standards, with an SPD code of JFW, an RE code of 3, and a characterization of service of uncharacterized.  

3.  On 5 March 2001, Orders 064-0382, DA, HQ, US Army Maneuver Support Center, Fort Leonard Wood, MO, discharged the applicant from the Army Reserve, effective 6 March 2001.

4.  The applicant’s service record does not contain any evidence of unauthorized absences or time lost.  

EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE APPLICANT'S RECORD:

1.  DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty), dated 6 March 2001.

2.  Discharge order 064-0382, dated 5 March 2001.

EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT:

The applicant provided a DD Form 293, a Veterans Affairs letter, dated 24 August 2001, and an email, dated 20 February 2001.

POST-SERVICE ACTIVITY: 

None submitted by the applicant.

REGULATORY AUTHORITY:

1.  Army Regulation 635-200 provides the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Paragraph 5-11 specifically provides that Soldiers who were not medically qualified under procurement medical fitness standards, when accepted for enlistment, or who became medically disqualified under these standards prior to entry on active duty or active duty training or initial entry training will be separated.  A medical proceeding, regardless of the date completed, must establish that a medical condition was identified by appropriate medical authority within six months of the Soldier’s initial entrance on active duty, that the condition would have permanently or temporarily disqualified the Soldier for entry into the military service had it been detected at that time, and the medical condition does not disqualify the Soldier from retention in the service under the provisions of Army Regulation 40-501, Chapter 3.  

2.  The characterization of service for Soldiers separated under this provision of the regulation will normally be honorable.  However, for Soldiers in entry-level status, it will be uncharacterized.  

3.  Army Regulation 635-200 states that a Soldier is in entry-level status if the Soldier has not completed more than 180 days of creditable continuous active duty prior to the initiation of the separation action. 

DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATION:

1.  The applicant’s request for an upgrade of the characterization of his discharge was carefully considered.  However, after a careful review of all the applicant’s available records for the period of enlistment under review and the issue and documents submitted with the application, there are insufficient mitigating factors to merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge.  

2.  The applicant’s record is void of the specific facts and circumstances concerning the events which led to his discharge from the Army; however, the record contains a properly constituted DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty), which was authenticated by the applicant’s signature.  This document identifies the reason and characterization of the discharge.  

3.  The DD Form 214 shows the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 5, paragraph 5-11, AR 635-200, for failure to meet procurement medical fitness standards with service uncharacterized.  In connection with such a discharge, the proceedings of an Entrance Physical Standards Board (EPSB) would have revealed the applicant had a medical condition which was disqualifying for enlistment and that it existed prior to entry on active duty.  Subsequently, competent medical authority would have had to approve the findings of the EPSB.  The applicant would have had to agree with the findings and the proposed action for administrative separation from the Army.  

4.  A Soldier is in entry-level status (ELS) for the first 180 days of continuous active duty.  The purpose of the entry-level status is to provide the Soldier a probationary period.  Army Regulation 635-200 also provides, except in cases of serious misconduct, that a Soldier’s service will be uncharacterized when his separation is initiated while the Soldier is in entry level status.  A general, under honorable conditions discharge is not authorized under ELS conditions and an honorable discharge may be granted only in cases which are clearly warranted by unusual circumstances involving outstanding personal conduct and/or performance of duty.  The applicant’s service record contains no such unusual circumstances and his service did not warrant an honorable discharge.  It appears that all requirements of law and regulation were met and that the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process.  

5.  The applicant's contentions were carefully considered.  However, a determination as to the merit of these contentions cannot be made because the facts and circumstances leading to the discharge are unknown.  The applicant must meet the burden of proof by providing the appropriate documents such as the discharge packet or other evidence sufficient to explain the facts, circumstances, and reasons underlying the separation action, for the Board's consideration.  If the applicant desires a personal appearance hearing he must meet the burden of proof since the discharge packet is not available in the official record. 

6.  Therefore, based on the available evidence and on the presumption of government regularity, it appears the reason for discharge and the characterization of service being both proper and equitable, recommend the Board deny relief.

SUMMARY OF ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING:

Type of Hearing: Records Review		  Date:  9 October 2013       Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  No 

Counsel: None

Board Vote:
Character Change:  0	No Change:  5
Reason Change:	0	No Change:  5
(Board member names available upon request)

Board Action Directed:
Issue a new DD Form 214:			No	
Change Characterization to:		No Change
Change Reason to:				No Change
Change Authority for Separation:		No Change
Change RE Code to:			No Change
Grade Restoration to:			NA
Other:						NA














AMHRR - Army Military Human Resource Record	FG - Field Grade	IADT – Initial Active Duty Training	 	RE - Reentry
AWOL - Absent Without Leave	GD - General Discharge	NA - Not applicable	SCM- Summary Court Martial
BCD - Bad Conduct Discharge	HS - High School	NIF - Not in File	SPCM - Special Court Martial
CG - Company Grade Article 15	HD - Honorable Discharge	OAD - Ordered to Active Duty	UNC - Uncharacterized Discharge  
CID - Criminal investigation Department	MP – Military Police	OMPF - Official Military Personnel File	UOTHC - Under Other Than                           			               Honorable Conditions


ADRB Case Report and Directive (cont)		AR20130006312



Page 5 of 5 pages


ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB)

CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE



1